Hamas has spent years stockpiling desperately needed fuel, food and medicine, as well as ammo and weapons, in the miles of tunnels it has carved out under Gaza.
Yes you were referring to the Al-Aqsa flood. As a means to distract from the ongoing genocide that the Israeli government feels it is entitled to do. You refer to it as if this is the start of the chain of causalities and not a link on the ongoing war thats been going on since Israel was founded. You grasp for a context that will make the ongoing cruelty and savagery at least understandable, perhaps even seem justified. No such context exists.
A few days ago a group of Israelis tortured, killed and then burned the bodies of a couple Palestinians. They said that it’s in revenge of the events of 7/10.
Do you also understand and perhaps even justify it?
My point isn’t the litigation of every single event, neither the Al-Aqsa flood nor the settlers response to it. My point is the reason for this war is colonialism. This is what I said in my other comment:
The history is complicated in the sense that it is war with many atrocities and injustices. But the root of the issue, the cause for all these atrocities that the colonialists suffer in retaliation is colonialism.
And there is no context in which the systematic oppression of the native Palestinians by the Israeli Apartheid state is understandable or justified.
And I’m saying that you’re wrong. The Arab-Jewish conflict can be traced long before Israel and many Jews lived or arrive to the area before many of the Palestinians.
It’s a very complex conflict, that it’s currently deadlocked and unsolvable. The colonisation in the west bank is just one small part of it, and the easiest one to solve. Presenting it as if it’s the main or only issue is what I meant by Americanising the conflict.
I believe we are going in circles here. Whenever the point of how the state of Israel was established comes up you want to skip a few centuries back as if that makes any difference to the genocide that has been perpetrated by the israeli militants since 1947. And like I said in my other comment, the history is complex but the morality is not. I stand against colonialism even in the face of cruel action against the colonialist settlers. There is nothing to justify ongoing colonialism.
As for unsolvable, it isn’t. But since it would involve the israeli people to look at what they did, the extremists using their religion as a means to an end to be silenced and for many israelis to give up some of their privileges it isn’t a solution that will come by peacably.
If you really are interested in the historical context of certain actions I would recommend Noam Chomsky’s tome “The fateful triangle”. And it really is like Edward Said says in its foreword about Chomsky’s claim
Israel and the United States - especially the latter - are rejectionists opposed to peace, whereas the Arabs, including the PLO, for years have been trying to accommodate themselves to the reality of Israel.
I don’t understand this claim. Can you explain?
You’re diverting, arguing with a straw man and pushing propaganda. Everything you said can be disproved by a quick Google search.
I’m going to pull the “no u” card here, because you’re the one who brought up “how this war started” to divert from the ongoing genocide.
I was referring to the attack on 7/10.
You framed it as a battle in an ongoing war that been going since Israel was founded.
I answered that if we want to look at the history of the Jewish Arab conflict it can be traced to the early days of Islam.
Your response to that was false propaganda.
Yes you were referring to the Al-Aqsa flood. As a means to distract from the ongoing genocide that the Israeli government feels it is entitled to do. You refer to it as if this is the start of the chain of causalities and not a link on the ongoing war thats been going on since Israel was founded. You grasp for a context that will make the ongoing cruelty and savagery at least understandable, perhaps even seem justified. No such context exists.
I see.
A few days ago a group of Israelis tortured, killed and then burned the bodies of a couple Palestinians. They said that it’s in revenge of the events of 7/10.
Do you also understand and perhaps even justify it?
My point isn’t the litigation of every single event, neither the Al-Aqsa flood nor the settlers response to it. My point is the reason for this war is colonialism. This is what I said in my other comment:
The history is complicated in the sense that it is war with many atrocities and injustices. But the root of the issue, the cause for all these atrocities that the colonialists suffer in retaliation is colonialism.
And there is no context in which the systematic oppression of the native Palestinians by the Israeli Apartheid state is understandable or justified.
And I’m saying that you’re wrong. The Arab-Jewish conflict can be traced long before Israel and many Jews lived or arrive to the area before many of the Palestinians.
It’s a very complex conflict, that it’s currently deadlocked and unsolvable. The colonisation in the west bank is just one small part of it, and the easiest one to solve. Presenting it as if it’s the main or only issue is what I meant by Americanising the conflict.
I believe we are going in circles here. Whenever the point of how the state of Israel was established comes up you want to skip a few centuries back as if that makes any difference to the genocide that has been perpetrated by the israeli militants since 1947. And like I said in my other comment, the history is complex but the morality is not. I stand against colonialism even in the face of cruel action against the colonialist settlers. There is nothing to justify ongoing colonialism.
As for unsolvable, it isn’t. But since it would involve the israeli people to look at what they did, the extremists using their religion as a means to an end to be silenced and for many israelis to give up some of their privileges it isn’t a solution that will come by peacably.
If you really are interested in the historical context of certain actions I would recommend Noam Chomsky’s tome “The fateful triangle”. And it really is like Edward Said says in its foreword about Chomsky’s claim
http://goodtimesweb.org/documentation/2012/Noam-Chomsky-Fateful-Triangle.pdf